Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court affirms ITAT decision on non-existent purchases, stresses importance of evidence</h1> The Court upheld the ITAT's decision in a case concerning alleged non-existent purchases by the assessee. It found that the Revenue's challenge based on a ... Validity of order passed by ITAT - allegation of non-existent or bogus transaction. - Held that:- The ITAT cannot be faulted in its approach in rendering the findings of fact – The order of the ITAT and the discussion shows that the ITAT took note of the materials before the AO and the CIT (A), which included the assessee’s books of accounts as well as the Sales Tax records of Shree Laxmi Industrial Corporation - These established firmly and conclusively that the claim of the assessee that it had purchased goods from Shree Laxmi Industrial Corporation were borne out - The ITAT also noted that the income-tax authorities had not even rejected the books of the assessee even while finding the claim as genuine transaction to be bogus – There was no error in the order of the Tribunal - No substantial question of law arises – Decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Allegation of non-existent purchases against the assessee.2. Consideration of evidentiary value of statements recorded during survey under Section 133A.3. Relevance of supporting documents in establishing the genuineness of claimed purchases.4. Allocation of onus to establish the genuineness of transactions.5. Justification for addition based on alleged bogus purchases.6. Assessment of ITAT's findings and dismissal of appeal.Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the allegation of non-existent purchases against the assessee. The Revenue challenged the ITAT's order, claiming that the findings were perverse due to the statement of a director alleging that a significant sum was part of bogus transactions. The AO and Commissioner of Appeals relied on this statement to make an addition to the assessee's income.2. The Court considered the evidentiary value of the statement recorded during a survey under Section 133A. It noted that the statement by D.K. Jain and the subsequent retraction by the assessee were crucial factors. The ITAT highlighted that statements recorded during surveys may lack evidentiary value and emphasized the importance of providing the assessee with an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.3. Another crucial aspect was the relevance of supporting documents in establishing the genuineness of claimed purchases. The ITAT scrutinized various documents provided by the assessee, including sales tax records, purchase bills, and bank statements of the supplier. These documents were crucial in demonstrating the authenticity of the transactions and were not adequately considered by the tax authorities.4. The Court addressed the allocation of onus to establish the genuineness of transactions. It emphasized that the department bore the onus of proving that the claimed purchases were not genuine since the allegation was raised by the department. The availability of primary evidence shifted the burden to the department, and the failure to disprove the genuineness of transactions was highlighted.5. The justification for the addition based on alleged bogus purchases was thoroughly analyzed. The ITAT reviewed the trading results of previous years and determined that the assessee's improved gross profit rate in the relevant year did not warrant the addition. The Court concurred with this assessment, emphasizing that the department should have estimated income based on trading results if necessary.6. Finally, the Court assessed the ITAT's findings and concluded that the order did not contain any errors warranting the framing of substantial questions of law. The appeal was deemed unmerited and dismissed, affirming the ITAT's decision based on a comprehensive analysis of the facts and legal principles involved in the case.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found